click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130211
20130211
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
secretary former senator chuck hagel at his confirmation hearing i think it is fair to say you gave him a real going over about his opposition about the iraq troop surge in 2007. let's take a look at that. >> were you correct or incorrect? yes, or no. >> my reference to -- >> can you answer the question, senator hagel. the question is were you right or wrong? >> chris: i got a question for you. how are you going to vote on the hagel nomination? >> we still have some more information but again that wasn't an academic discussion i was having with senator hagel. we were losing the war in 2006 and when the president came around president bush who i had been very critical of came around and sent david petraeus and the surge we succeeded in iraq. now, because of the obama administration actions afterwards we are losing and badly unraveling. the fact is if we hadn't done that more american lives would have been lost unnecessarily. so for then senator hagel to say well, he will let history be the judge. he was there and involved and i'm sure he is wrong and he knows he is wrong on the basis of
says he will block confirmation of chuck hagel for defense secretary and john brennan for c.i.a. until they clear up issues ranging from the terrorist attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi to enhanced interrogation techniques for suspected terrorists. i don't think we should allow brennan to go forward for the c.i.a. directorship, hagel to be confirmed to secretary of defense until white house gives us an accounting. >> democrats are angry and worried. >> what is unfortunate is the account to politicize an issue. they need to be confirmed. >> hagel is not for defense secretary faces committee vote wednesday. some republicans, though not mccain threatened to walk out in protest. hagel and brennan nomination could be put on hold before a final floor vote. should either nomination get that far they could face filibusters. >> i want 60-vote margin. you don't have to fill buster to get. they would threat on the call 60-vote margin. >> the president's only new confirmed secretary is john kerry replacing hillary clinton at state. but kerry was the president's second choice, only after u.n.
in benghazi. >> i don't think we should allow brennan to go forward for the cia directorship, hagel to be confirmed as secretary of defense until the white house gives us an accounting, did the president ever pick up the phone and call anyone in the libyan government to help these folks? what did the president do? yes, i'm going to ask my colleagues just like they did with john bolton, joe biden said, no confirmation without information. no confirmation without information. >> you are saying that you are going to block the nominations -- you're going to block them from coming to a vote until you get an answer? >> yes. >> now, john mccain has already think that he doesn't think republicans ought to filibuster this. what will you do? you're just going to put a hold on it? >> yeah, i'm not filibustering. this is a national security failure of monumental proportions, and i'm not going to stop until we get to the bottom of it. >> first of all, i'm shocked. you know, lindsey graham doesn't usually like getting in front of a camera and going on the sunday talk shows. so i'm shocked that li
, john brennan and for defense secretary, chuck hagel unless the president provides more information on the september 2012 attack on our consulate in benghazi, libya. listen to this. >> how could they say after panetta and dempsey said it was a terrorist attack that night, how could the president say for two weeks after the attack it was the result of a video? how could susan rice come on to show to say there is no evidence of a terrorist attack when sick tear of defense and joint chiefs knew that that night? i think that was a misleading narrative three weeks before our election. >> he is hanging onto this in a big way. joining me, kt mcfarland, fox news security analyst . what do you think he is saying, kt? >> what he is talking about is the most significant part. and that is the president had nothing to do with this. that the secretary of defense and the chairman of joint chiefs of staff now said at the beginning of this attack american embassy under attack, american ambassador gone missing they told the president and that was it. the president had nothing more to do with it. mart
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)